Plasma display revenue to begin dropping in 2009

LCD TVs are now continuously beating sales of Plasma displays and as a result, iSuppli, an industry research firm has stated that Plasma revenues will peak in 2008 before beginning a steady decline in 2009.

To date, revenue growth has been pretty good for Plasmas thanks to falling average selling prices which have boosted sales. The price drops are thanks to huge competition from LCDs as well as declining costs for display materials.

Worldwide Plasma revenue is expected to rise to $8.6 billion USD for 2007, up over 11 percent from 2006. Revenue is also expected to swell to $10.2 billion USD in 2008 due to increased production of larger sized panels. iSuppli believes that after 2008 however, plasma revenue should begin a steep decline, hitting $8.7 billion USD in 2011.

"In order for plasma manufacturers to continue to be successful in the market, they must weather the storm of LCDs while focusing consumer interest on PDPs' attractive form factors and reasonable prices," Riddhi Patel, principal analyst for television systems at iSuppli, said in a statement.

For the first quarter 2007, Matsushita held 31.5% of the plasma market in terms of revenue, with LG, Samsung, Fujitsu and Pioneer rounding out the rest of the top 5.

10 user comments

HAHA, Ya think! if you didn't see this coming well you haven't looked & the differences! Plasmas use more energy, have shorter life span & can have issues @ higher altitude areas! Just Google it plasma vs lcd even toss in energy comparison @ then end of that Google! see what you find! i love my LCD! despite the higher prices @ first i never wanted a PLASMA! Oh my LCD is cool to touch i bet your plasma isn't!

Originally posted by ripxrush: HAHA, Ya think! if you didn't see this coming well you haven't looked & the differences! Plasmas use more energy, have shorter life span & can have issues @ higher altitude areas! Just Google it plasma vs lcd even toss in energy comparison @ then end of that Google! see what you find! i love my LCD! despite the higher prices @ first i never wanted a PLASMA! Oh my LCD is cool to touch i bet your plasma isn't!

You go ahead an continue thinking LCDs are better than Plasmas. I'll enjoy my 58" 1080p Plasma knowing my TV has larger size, better contrast, color, and viewing angle. I could care less about using more energy because I can afford to pay the minuscule difference in the electric bill vs. if I would have an LCD. As far as the life span goes, my TV has a rated half life span of between 30K - 60K hours. LCDs have 60K hours. My TV is on between 4 and 6 hours per day. Even at 30K hours that would mean my plasma would have a half life of 16 years. CRTs have a half life of 25K years. This just proves that your reasons for choosing an LCD are bogus and you are trying to justify your overpriced, smaller LCD TV. The bottom line for me is size and picture quality. Good luck buying an affordable 58" LCD TV.

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 13 Aug 2007 @ 4:43

Given the fact that these were initially offered at extremely high prices, and the LCD's were offered at relatively affordable prices, this isn't surprising. Plasma waited to long to lower their prices.

Consumers are begining to realise that LCD is better than Plasma due to the fact that it last longer. The quality may not be as good as plasma but its still high and due to the long life of LCCD consumers are showing that in numbers.

Regarding the power consumption, the plasma TV's take about 2× the power of LCD. Consider this example
LCD 180 Watts 40" (Sony KDL-40S3000)
Plasma 387 Watts 42" (Panasonic TH-42PX77U)
Sorry they not exactly the same size, but they are close enough.

As for the cost of operation, let's assume 5 hours per day and $0.19/kWh and there are 365 days per year and 1000watt = 1kW.
LCD = $62.42/year 180*5*365*0.19/1000
Plasma = $134.20/year 387*5*365*0.19/1000
This is a difference of $71.77 per year. Assuming the TV lasts 10 years this is a difference of
$717 more for plasma electricity versus LCD
over the lifetime of the TV

As for the gentleman with the 58" plasma, this consumes 735 Watts.
58" Plasma = $254.86/year 735*5*365*0.19/1000
for a 10 year life this is $2548.61.
The point is that the electricity costs are significant here and I don't think many people consider that when buy a TV.
Thanks
John

hmmm, well plasma VS. lcd ...i never bought a plasma simply because a buddy who has worked for a Electronics place for 20 years told me not to. they have one lcd returned for repair vs. 6 plasma's .that alone was enough for me . the main reason for plasma return ? ...BURN IN ! thats not covered under warranty . but on the lcd side of the argument , i played oblivion on the 360 from thanksgiving 06 till march 07 ..at least 8 hrs a day ( un-employed silver spoon )and no burn in what so ever . plasma's cant hang in this department ...

Nobody here get's it. When you have people over to watch something and they can't see because they are looking at it from the blind angle and you can't move chairs or sofas around to appease everybody your party is over and they leave saying your a cheap stupid bastard! And even if you don't entertain it still sucks that it does that anyway. Nobody cares about the electric bill or which might last longer. Everyone cares about picture quality bottom line. Plasmas will always be available just because of this until something better comes along.